logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.01.14 2013가합162
계약금 등 반환
Text

1. Defendant B’s KRW 60,000,000 as well as annual 5% from May 22, 2013 to January 14, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On October 201, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant B and “Defendant B, by December 201, to have the Plaintiff purchase KRW 650,000,000, out of KRW 100,000, out of KRW 33-type apartment units located in the locking room 2 and 3-type apartment units located in the apartment complex, and to receive KRW 60,000,000 as the down payment” (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

On November 2, 2011, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 60,000,000 to Defendant C as down payment of the instant contract, and Defendant C delivered the said KRW 60,000,000 to Defendant B.

Since December 201, the Plaintiff asked Defendant B to purchase 2 and 3 apartment units unsold in lots in accordance with the instant agreement. However, the Plaintiff failed to purchase 2 and 3 apartment units unsold in lots in accordance with the instant agreement until the date of closing argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 6-1 to 46, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff either claims the return of the down payment of KRW 60,000 or claims for damages equivalent to the same amount, as to this part, ① restitution based on the termination of the instant agreement, ② implementation of the refund agreement on March 13, 2012, ③ selective claims for damages arising from tort.

According to the facts of the premise of the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B failed to perform the obligation of the Plaintiff to purchase two unsold apartment units located in the lock room 2 and 3 complexes pursuant to the instant agreement, and the fact that Defendant B’s declaration of intent was served on May 21, 2013 on the ground of Defendant B’s nonperformance of obligation as above is apparent in the record that the duplicate of the complaint of this case, stating the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the instant agreement, was served on Defendant B. Thus, the instant agreement was lawfully terminated on May 21, 2013 due to Defendant B’s nonperformance of obligation.

Therefore, Defendant B’s termination following the Plaintiff.

arrow